Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    The principle is highly controversial. — Carmelics
    Home/Virtue Ethics
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The argument against pluralism about values relies on a controversial principle about how explanations of why something is a value must work.

    The principle is highly controversial.

    Truth & KnowledgeVirtue Ethics
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Virtue EthicsTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    The argument against pluralism about values relies on a controversial principle ...The argument in question depends on a principle about the proper form of explana...This principle is similar to one appealed to in the argument that intrinsic valu...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Virtue Ethics
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.

    Similar

    Williamson (2000) provides an influential argument against the KK prin...82%New Rational Reflection is a Non-Akrasia principle81%A principle and its contrary cannot both be true79%Moral principles should not play a role in deliberation even if some t...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: value-theory
    View source passageHide passage
    This argument relies on a highly controversial principle about how an explanation of why something is a value must work — a very similar principle to that which was appealed to in the argument that intrinsic value must be an intrinsic property [section 2.1.1]. If this principle is false, then an explanatory theory of why both pleasure and knowledge are values can be offered which does not work by subsuming them under a further, more fundamental value. Reductive theories of what it is to be a val

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective